By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Are games today really worth the asking price?

No. Never have been, never will be no matter how much time you invest in them.

Are they ever really at full price though? I bought Guild wars 2 for 48 the other day and Fall of Cybertron for 50 when they both should be retailing for 60. Way I personally see it is we're paying for early access as most of these games drop price by up to 50% after several months.



Around the Network

If you are willing to pay the price they ask for it then of course they are worth it.

It's up to anyone of us to decide if they are worth it or not, in the same way that for some poeple paying more than 100 € for a concert is ok while others find it a non-sense.

Personally I'd buy a Super Mario game for 60 €, but I wouldn't pay anything for Angry Birds.



Please excuse my bad English.

Former gaming PC: i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Current gaming PC: R5-7600, 32GB RAM 6000MT/s (CL30) and a RX 9060XT 16GB

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

i usualy buy games that are one year old and try to go for the GOTY/complete editions for that extra content for less cash... i don't need to play the latest game to enjoy gaming, only need to play relatively recent and good games... patience is a virtue.



Proudest Platinums - BF: Bad Company, Killzone 2 , Battlefield 3 and GTA4

Of course not. Back in the day in they were. I played games like Streeets of Rage, Megaman, Mario 3/World, Sonics, Final Fantasies ext .. for years, not a couple of days, not month .. Years. games back then shoulda been 60. They deserve it.

I beat Chrono Trigger & FF4 so many times it ridiculous



CChaos said:
mike_intellivision said:
I love how people use Angry Birds as the epitome of what can be done for a buck.

I subscribe to "Apps Gone Free" and almost everything there is not worth the price that is charged on that day -- which is nothing. (For example, Angry Birds Seasons was included and my son's reaction was ''Delete it" -- and full Angry Birds is $3 on an iPad, BTW).

...

As much as people get a chuckle (or, in some cases, just get outraged) off of the Angry Bird comparisons that a lot of folks use, it's actually pretty valid. It is now THE example given to a lot of developers that you CAN and DO make money off of mobile device gaming. Angry Birds is the 'pulled yourself up by your bootstraps' success story that tended to fill the early days of computers and gaming and what not. The fact that the gameplay gets boring after like three minutes is completely irrelevant in the monetary scope. It shows that there is a market for dollar games and that they are able to reach the types of numbers for casual gamers that well surpasses typical console gamers.

I mean, it goes down to basic numbers...

Total Number of Combined Wii, 360 and PS3: About 230m.

Total Number of iPhones: Just under 200m (obviously higher if you include iPads).

Total Number of Android Devices: Above 250m.

Angry Birds is now doing well enough that their company is larger, there are Angry Birds toys invading toy stores and they even hired a guy to start putting together an Angry Birds movie. You can't do this on peanuts, so they're obviously doing pretty well. And that's what companies see, not 'is the game interesting at all?' or 'could I still play this if my brain was not a brain, but a bundle of basic nerve cells that twitch occasionally?'. This is why all of these groups are running to get as many iOS and Android games out as possible, even if 99.9% of them are absolutely horrific piles of shovelware.

But, to the original question: I haven't bought a full priced game in years, because I don't want to spend $50 to $60 on one. I just wait for Steam sales.

To go completely off-topic, Angry Birds is a wonderful success story. But it (a) is too often interpreted as the norm rather than an outlier and (b) on the verge of becoming over-exposed and passe' in my opinion (at least).

 

Mike from Morgantown



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV

Around the Network

For a lot of games $60 is probably too much. I say this because developers and publishers are finding many new ways to make money out of us with micro-transactions, over-priced DLC and having to pay for an online pass if you buy second hand.

They could charge less up front but continue to support a game with appropriately priced DLC plus cheap in-game items and keep revenue streams going for much longer. A cheaper Day1 price would also likely lead to more people purchasing the game early meaning you can hook players in earlier and potentially, for longer.



the2real4mafol said:
I heard, PS3's sell for about $600 in Brazil!!, they were $1000 at launch!!!

I can confirm this. I've payed around US$600 for mine. Today, it still costs US$ 450~US$500. And new games are US$ 100. I would like if it was cheaper, but I believe they're worth the money, specially when you can buy it for US$ 60 in the USA.

AAA games are complex to make, and nextgen will make it more expensive.



the 60 dollar price tag is somehow in an odd way a personal preference whether that someone is willing to pay that price or not for specific games. It becomes an issue of "is this specific game worth 60$ for me or not"



Most games in the UK are around 40 quid. They are worth it in my opinion. You get hours of enjoyment for your money and you can keep enjoying it for years to come.



I would say no but I hear about devs going under all the time so I can only imagine if prices were reasonable.



"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius